Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for April, 2020

Will colleges and universities come back as completely different institutions? Here is a list of possible changes some administrators are already considering: A freeze on new hires; reduction of benefits; elimination of programs and research projects; voluntary and involuntary salary reductions; merit raise freezes; closure of buildings; modifying fundraising expectations; specific uses of endowment funds; continued use of remote on-line technology for teaching and support staff; easing of admissions requirements; tuition freezes and reductions; mergers with other institutions; partnerships with community colleges; cutting travel for business and conferences; becoming more global through on-line interactions; planning for anticipated reductions in government underwriting, financial aid, and research; holding the entire fall semester on-line; cancelling fall completely and starting up again in 2021.

Can intercollegiate sports as we knew them be brought back? Here are some administrative worries: Filling stadiums when that revenue is required; reevaluating income potential from luxury suites, reserved parking, and premium seating packages; holding on to needed television and radio revenue; dealing with huge head coach and assistant coach salaries; finding alternatives to funding minor sports from major sports revenues; cancelling some sports temporarily, or completely; effectively utilizing first-class stadiums originally built to provide more income options, attract star athletes, and accommodate premium level donors; dealing with lingering COVID-19 fears; handling any continuing NCAA player and coach violations; recovering from a conference decision to cancel the fall season; considering the possibility of increasing public interest in club sports.

Specific vulnerabilities will determine each college’s fate. Some will survive major changes… and others might not.

  • taken from a scan of The Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Education, University World News, and thoughts from my 50 year career in higher education.  

Read Full Post »

Truth in politics comes much the same way it does in teaching…

I never thought about it this way until graduate school. It was there I first realized that the really great teachers were actually “living their subject-matter,” and that this was the real appeal of a career in education. Students came in and out of their lives, but the best teachers were constantly growing and changing by living their subject-matter every day.

I found in my teaching that living my subject-matter meant getting lost in my own world of communication and media when and where students could engage with me. As I referenced the best experts and reflected on the consequences of media revolutions, new thoughts would magically pop into my head. Truth would therefore gradually come to us by constantly searching for it together.

In retirement, however, I now teach about media, communication and politics without a classroom. My students are the readers of my blog. My new ideas appear during walks, or while struggling for clarity. I read the experts, try every day to pull some truth out of the media fog, and continue to interact with individuals and small groups as I am able.

This is what I learned…

Finding truth in politics today requires searching the cluttered media everyday for bits and piece of it. Our task is to compile the pieces that make sense to us, realizing that our conclusions are likely to change as we go… just as they do in successful teaching careers.      

 

Read Full Post »

Several months ago I wrote how disappointed I was with both party’s behavior in Washington.

Instead of paying attention to meeting the needs of people in middle America they were focused on fighting each other. This opened the door for anyone promising to meet those needs to become president. I remember even writing about the feasibility of a third party candidate, or even a charismatic independent running for president and winning.

Now we have COVID-19. The obvious thought is that this should be a great opportunity for bipartisan problem-solving and leadership. But, alas, political polarization continues.

The president is obviously using his daily press briefings as a platform for re-election. He is blaming governors and even the World Health Organization. He is ignoring true experts and even occasional advice from inside the White House. And he recently made inspector-general and other personnel changes to align his daily briefings with his campaign. There are are even growing concerns about how the money allocated by Congress to help those losing jobs will be managed. So far his party appears to support him… probably out of fear of losing their own elections. As a consequence, Democrats in the House and Senate are also drawn into these politicized, and therefore polarizing, battles.

Political party scholars have observed in the past that criticism of presidential leadership generally grows over time, and this often causes a swing in political direction to the other party. It looks like this is happening right now… even before the end of this president’s first term.

So those who find his self-praising and dictatorial behavior dangerous to national security, or who are just fed up with politicizing a universally life-threatening pandemic, will simply have to vote for the other party. Right now the public’s health, a reliable economic recovery, and American leadership credibility, are all at stake.

Read Full Post »

In a crisis, presidential press conferences traditionally are held for two reasons:

  1. To bring the country together by inspiring confidence in its leadership.
  2. To report new factual information about the crisis important for the public to know.

Today, presidential press conferences have these characteristics:

  1. They compel cable TV coverage, visibility, and big audiences.
  2. They give a former “reality TV” star a comfortable “rally style” format.
  3. They confuse and divert attention when facts were ignored and denied far too long.
  4. They allow putting critics on the defensive, including legitimate professional journalists.
  5. They strive to create the of illusion of leadership in the absence of knowledge.
  6. They keep the president’s political base intact… cruelty and lies have become style characteristics acceptable by far too many.

It’s time for cable networks to stop daily live coverage, and only report outcomes when the two traditional reasons for presidential press conferences are met. This is because:

  1. Rambling on for hours only confuses everyone.
  2. The integrity of professional journalism must be much better demonstrated.
  3. The unmet needs of those in “the president’s base” should be constantly explained by the press.
  4. Those who can meet those needs should be identified and challenged to do so.
  5. The consequences of ongoing political polarization in Washington should be constantly explained.

Read Full Post »